Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2017
Accuracy of Ultrasonography for the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Torres-Costoso Ana, Martínez-Vizcaíno Vicente, Álvarez-Bueno Celia, Ferri-Morales Asunción, Cavero-Redondo Iván
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of inlet and outlet ultrasonography measurements for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception to February 2017.
STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of inlet and outlet ultrasonography measurements were selected.
DATA EXTRACTION: Random-effects models for the diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) values computed by Moses' constant for a linear model and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the accuracy of the test. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled dOR values for the diagnosis of CTS were 31.11 (95% CI, 20.42-47.40) for inlet-level and 16.94 (95% CI, 7.58-37.86) for outlet-level measurements. The 95% confidence region for the point that summarizes overall test performance of the included studies occurred where the cutoffs ranged from 9.0 to 12.6mm2 for inlet-level measurements and from 9.5 to 10.0mm2 for outlet-level measurements.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ultrasonography measurements for the diagnosis of CTS showed sufficient accuracy for their use in clinical settings, although the overall accuracy was slightly higher for inlet-level than for outlet-level measurements. The addition of outlet and inlet measurements does not increase the accuracy for the diagnosis. Therefore, the inlet-level ultrasonography measurement appears to be an appropriate method for the diagnosis of CTS.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception to February 2017.
STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of inlet and outlet ultrasonography measurements were selected.
DATA EXTRACTION: Random-effects models for the diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) values computed by Moses' constant for a linear model and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the accuracy of the test. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled dOR values for the diagnosis of CTS were 31.11 (95% CI, 20.42-47.40) for inlet-level and 16.94 (95% CI, 7.58-37.86) for outlet-level measurements. The 95% confidence region for the point that summarizes overall test performance of the included studies occurred where the cutoffs ranged from 9.0 to 12.6mm2 for inlet-level measurements and from 9.5 to 10.0mm2 for outlet-level measurements.
CONCLUSIONS: Both ultrasonography measurements for the diagnosis of CTS showed sufficient accuracy for their use in clinical settings, although the overall accuracy was slightly higher for inlet-level than for outlet-level measurements. The addition of outlet and inlet measurements does not increase the accuracy for the diagnosis. Therefore, the inlet-level ultrasonography measurement appears to be an appropriate method for the diagnosis of CTS.